Tuesday, October 08, 2024

  Certainly "GPS fits Special Relativity..But Why Not Gravity?"


As I say I believe gravity is a blue shift at a much different level of energy than something like centrifugal force or inertia because e.g. the equations for centrifugal force and gravity are much different and gravity moves masses together and the closer together they move the more gravity they have. Inertia tends to keep things moving forward and disconnected so they move outward like the radiance of a gas, the opposite of gravity.



 You might ask what about the Mossbaur effect or GPS. GPS seems to be a relativist's dream superficially. It seems to fit both special and general relativity well. While I can say certainly that special relativity is well founded, mass and energy seem to be inequivalent because it's much easier to convert mass to energy than vice versa, and thus a way to claim that gravity and inertia are not necessarily the same thing, as in gravity is more like mass and inertia is more like energy, as I say no experiment by Einstein's method will show any distinction inside the inertial elevator or the gravitational elevator  by the Earth. 


 Yet if you drop the masses in the inertial elevator or the gravitational elevator and you count the distance between them with time and you also note that at least one frame of reference in the inertial elevator will have the two masses moving in uniform motion, no frame of reference in the gravitational elevator has this ability.


 Just as no inertial frame of reference can transform away the surface of a bucket of rotation of water so it's level, Einstein's idea seems incomplete.


 If we add atomic clocks to the masses as they fall in both the inertial and gravitational elevator we see a related effect, the inertial clocks are unchanging with time at any rate  in this frame of reference but the gravitational clocks are continually changing the speed of the clocks by all inertal frames of reference according to any observer. This is because by the different accelerations of the gravitational field the force acting on each mass by the tide is actually more internal and because gravity brings things together so that they're more inside than outside the field like the field of the Earth.


 This about the transformation away of the inertial force in the inertial elevator by at least one frame of motion can be seen easily with an inertial frame in uniform motion both for the inertial and the gravitational elevator. 

If Einstein's elevator has elevator cars within it and one is released at one time in motion at the top of the elevator and the other is released the second time following it down, from the perspective of the lower elevator car which was released from the elevator was moving slowly, the elevator car above it is moving in uniform motion, this is true in a reciprocal way.

In the gravitational accelerated elevator, the observers falling with the mass in the elevator cars will see motion away from each other no matter what and it's not reciprocal. The faster moving elevator below the other will see the other as blueshifted and the clocks will speed up in the upper elevator will see the lower elevator as red shifted and the clock will slow down and this is not reciprocal. Even so the inertial elevator observers will measure the other elevator having the same red shift of motion no matter which of the two observers are asked.

The observers in the gravitational elevator have different mass and energy essentially so work is being done on the field and the atomic clocks will have the different reading that Einstein believed was equivalent for the accelerated inertial elevator and this corresponds to the change in the speed of light with gravity that relativity doesn't allow.

You might ask since relativity is about all observers why we couldn't use accelerated frames of reference for both elevators and thus transform away any of the motion of masses moving apart in the accelerated inertial or gravitational elevator?

Suppose we have a setup where we have lights lighting up inside of the inertial elevator to tell the outside observer in accelerated motion where those falling masses are. 


 These two masses are moving apart and you have the accelerated frame (if it's going in a positive direction with the motion of the falling masses to give the equivalent measure of the gravitational elevator.)


 But if we try to do the same thing with the gravitational elevator it takes no propulsion or a different amount of force to go with that motion.


The two elevators inside of the rocket moving upward through the field distant from more cosmic masses are not themselves in an accelerated frame. 


I think of them as having gyroscopic stability internally that makes them both in their rest frame or the frame of uniform motion depending on the observer.  


 So the only body accelerating inside the inertial frame is the rocket itself but not the two elevator boxes I combine here in my own version of Einstein's thought experiment with his hopes of unifying inertia with gravity.


 They move in uniform motion relative to each other and so there is no red shift between the masses, unlike in the gravitational accelerated elevator. There is no induction between the two  masses in uniform motion inside the inertial elevator.. while the elevator that Einstein imagined here is accelerating upward, only it is doing work on the field. 


 Einstein's accelerated elevator in the inertial frame is working against the gyroscopic stability of the quanta that make it up but not the two elevator cars which are in uniform motion.


 Yet we might say what about the field that the elevator itself is working against and how we see the result of the pressure on the elevator in the force felt in the frame of the elevator?


 More particularly below the quantum level the back reaction of the field makes quanta resist changes so they're below the level of the wavelength of the light, and this is the explanation for uniform motion. 


 The back reaction of the field to cause inertia is an ancient idea.. Aristotle believed for example that inertia is caused by the back reaction of mass moving through the air. 


 We can say that the two elevator cars in the inertial rocket or elevator are moving in uniform motion relative to each other, yet it also seems that the accelerating frame of the larger elevator that Einstein imagined is exerting force the a field  Maxwell and others invoked to explain different types of phenomena.


 I think the reality of the field wins out here and even for uniform motion, I hold there may be low energy mass induction even of the two masses moving in the inertial elevator, this corresponds to the non-zero permeability of the low energy field to light Tesla noted. The degree of the induction might also be according to how much mass a body has.


 So as I say here are some of the things that we may note in the Relativistic Wind Tunnel RWT (if we move the field like generated by electromagnetic fields past the same kind of elevator with the masses falling in uniform motion in it in the lab..)


 The two elevator boxes will show no change in redshift because they're in uniform motion but there may be a certain amount of induction even so between the boxes and the accelerating rocket that contains them because the general motion of the frame of the rocket definitely shows signs of compression like the Lorentz contraction and so the field is definitely there (my belief is dark matter and dark energy for centrifugal and centripetal force as I see on the link below) even so it's a much lower energy acting on the two masses moving in uniform motion but nonetheless because the field has resistance to the light, there may also be a corresponding amount of mass induction of even masses in uniform motion like this between the accelerated frame and the elevator boxes. 


My belief is that there will be a certain jump point where the external field starts to act on an accelerating body, but we might also imagine phases of the change so that we can more reliably measure the resilience of the medium that Maxwell and an entire generation of mathematical physicists believed in. This may also be easy to find with optical tweezers that are being developed and the ability to measure much finer changes than just the level of the collapse of the wave function.


 This among other events are what I believe we might also find with the RWT.


 

 


 


 One idea of the relativists about gravity is that as the light goes upward from the surface of the Earth it's not with force on the light, and there is no work done on the light by the gravity. 


 You can see why Einstein's idea will only work at short distance because with more  distance the speed of light changes and a force is present contrary to what Einstein believed about gravity.


Or consider a spinning bucket of water. The accelerated wave in the bucket can be transformed away but only by a highly artificial method of speeding up and slowing down the observer as they pass over the bucket. 

Gravity actually causes the water in the bucket to have an acceleration like the surface of the oceans of the Earth, but the inertial influence of this on the bucket is much huger, and this is because of the inequivalence of gravity and inertia. There's a loose equivalence but it can't be made exact like Einstein believed. The world's ocean has a round acceleration but the water of the bucket is a parabola and is the centrifugal force is more huge and they have these distinctions because they aren't the same.


 Where exactly is the blue shift of gravity?


I think that inertia and gravity are not completely separate because inertia would correspond to the classic electromagnetic field lines that are laid down by the radiance out of the particles which are with uniform motion as Einstein believed, because in special relativity Einstein always would say that light is a particle unchanged from emission to absorption so the speed of light is constant. The inertial waves would radiate in and these particles would radiate out, this is because it's been believed by physicists that it's inconceivable there will be centifugal without centripetal force. And so these particles would also be associated with gravitational waves and particles also, Here however the gravitational particles are moving in and the waves are moving out. The gravitational waves and the inertial waves are interacting to make it so that nearer the source of gravity they zigzag back and forth between the lines of the common electromagnetic field lines and this causes the gravity. 

Blueshift occurs as the waves move in nearer to the source of gravity, for gravity at any rate and the lines of the electromagnetic force are redshifted, but the gravity is stronger than these lines and so there's contraction more than the gravity so the blue shift of gravity is holding the earth together by more volume on the outside than the inside. This tendency for the blueshift of gravity is expressed by the non reciprocal measure of two masses falling in the gravitational elevator. And without the blue shift of gravity the particles (being quanta and having sides) would radiate out without limit and so there wouldn't be enough force to hold the quanta and larger masses like the Earth together.


 Why does GPS work and seem to fit relatively so well? This would be because Einstein made the correct prediction about the speed of the acceleration of gravity or the GPS or satellites but his prediction was not based on the validity of relativity..


 As I say all masses don't necessarily fall at the same rate, and this was Einstein's relativistic basis he hoped to make predictions with like about GPS.


 This is where general relativity fails, because Einstein used equivalent motion to describe the downward motion of masses by the comical idea that we're accelerating upward at 32 ft per second in equivalent motion so all masses falling at the same rate, (not the Earth around the moon, or merely launching up two different masses with the same force where they go to different heights and fall at different speeds like the Earth and Moon). And his prediction as with GPS was where the change in the orbit of Mercury and other predictions of general relativity aren't by the opposite event and one or the other would give way, acceleration changing for Mercury or not changing for masses falling near the Earth and it's not that the masses fall at the same rate.


 GPS may seem to be a miracle for relativity, but not if the speed of light changes in a gravitational field and the atomic clocks give us a different result in the gravitational or inertial elevators. The special relativistic component of GPS is viable but not to predict the general relativistic events if we predict them based on the relativity of gravity.


 Einstein might have said, What about the equivalent gravitational contraction of the Earth itself as if by the Lorentz contraction of Special Relativity? While GPS may not match relativity, certainly we can say that there's no problem with gravity blueshifting because there's actually a sort of blue shift of the mass with the equivalent Lorentz contraction in Special Relativity, so it may seem they're unified once more and the Earth is not with more room inside than out by the red shift of light. 


But there's still the problem that the clocks will go at different rates than they should and that gravity changes the speed of light.


While Einstein's predictions about gravity are good and he advanced GPS events well, I would hold they're not based on general relativity. Because gravity is mostly not about relativity.


 Even if we say the mass accelerated to near the speed of light in special relativity has the Lorentz contraction, this itself would seem to be like an attraction inside that mass like gravity. If relativity by Einstein's belief can't describe what causes the Lorentz contraction with no low energy resilient medium that Maxwell used to predict the speed of light exactly with, it wouldn't cause gravity either. But if there's a faster than light field as I say like air for the sound of the train connecting up the light and the Lorentz contraction in SR, this could be used to unify with gravity because if the connection was only at the speed of light, the light couldn't be slowed down in the gravitational field.


Like Tesla believed I agree that The non-zero permeability of light to the low energy field may be evidence for superluminal effects around the light, just as the Lorentz contraction like the air around a train causes the train to compress just a bit along the line of motion.

While it's true no information is communicated between the high speed starship faster than the light by the light itself, any evidence for superluminal motion like this seems to be generally against relativity.

Just as the motion of the molecules of the air around the train are much faster than the speed of  sound through the air, at short range the air molecules would seem to need to be faster than sound because the sound wouldn't be able to propagate through the air without this.

"Speed of Sound: In air at room temperature (about 20°C or 68°F), the speed of sound is approximately 343 meters per second (m/s).



Speed of Air Molecules: The average speed of air molecules at room temperature is much higher, around 500 meters per second (m/s). This speed is due to the thermal motion of the molecules.

So, air molecules do move faster than the speed of sound. However, this doesn’t mean they can travel faster than sound over a distance. The speed of sound is the rate at which pressure waves (sound waves) propagate through the air, while the speed of air molecules refers to their random motion due to thermal energy."

But there's one thing here that leads me to think that a major component of the low energy electromagnetic field and also of gravity is faster than light and not like the more "random thermal motion". And this is because gravity has to have coherence and this coherence would hold the fields together including the Earth and this also keeps the lines of the low energy electromagnetic fields from bunching up or fizzling out and may also keep the heavy quanta spinning against the friction of the Higgs" particles which otherwise would rapidly cause them to lose energy.


 Another way of deriving the idea that the collapse of the wave function is faster than light (which much concerned Einstein) Is about light as it travels at the speed of light. The following edge of the quantum of light has to connect to the leading edge or it would fizzle out, evidence that something inside of the light holds it together (what powers the collapse of the wave function) at faster than light.


 It might seem that the problem with the atmosphere around the train or the high speed starship is even if we can use it to describe the Lorentz contraction this might seem much like the idea that no information can make it through so even if there are the superluminal effects around the light this will never match up to relativity. 


 Einstein believed that the speed of light was not a barrier but more like a sheet that wasn't necessarily absolute relativity. 

 It would seem improbable that if the waves are making the lines of the electromatic fields coherent  that no information makes it through for faster than light communication. Just as I believe that inertia and gravity are loosely connected Einstein might not have ruled out the looser connection like with spooky action and some of the information might make it through by Einstein's other idea that we might be able to get around the collapse of the wave function with the low energy quanta or some other method as I discuss. 

 I believe if we could find something like this we might be able to change the quantum without collapsing it so much and send information between the entangle quanta without the randomness of the collapse of the wave function being "an annoyance" cheaper than the saving of a Domino's Pizza!

Einstein got lots of publicity about both special and general relativity, and his other science contributions are beyond doubt. Anyone who comes up with any kind of criticism for general relativity may be with a sort of dogma of science. But this may be more from the publishing industry and not from science by what's left of big publishing after the internet. This seems to have been because Einstein began relativity at a time when events like publishing and Edison's audio technology made it so anyone might make a few records and earn lots of money fast.


 The publishing industry may have been so wild about Einstein so they forgot to look for more truth like this about the elevators and atomic clocks in general relativity.

 

I hold that it's possible that what LIGO has found is the speed of inertia because inertia radiates out and gravity radiates in as I say on pages like this..


Click here for what I consider to be my most up-to-date general page about Gravity relativity and the speed of light..